The 9/11 crime has taught me one thing: all humans, whether
religious, atheist or agnostic, whether Republican, Democrat or Progressive,
are susceptible to the conditioning process of government propaganda. We all
know there is something wrong with the government conspiracy theory about 9/11,
but we dare not question it. Anyone who dares to question the plausibility of
the government's conspiracy theory is ridiculed, shunned or derided. Most of us
can never bring ourselves to believe our government could be capable of
complicity in the murder of 3,000 American citizens. This incapacity on our
part to detect this evil in our government is a tribute to the effectiveness of
the propaganda machinery and our susceptibility to belief in mankind's inherent
goodness. It is only with constant vigilance we can resist all forms of
state-sponsored propaganda.

Mike BarnwellJohn Herrick, I have been struggling with the
implications of the video evidence of 9/11. Everytime
I lean towards the government's theory and then I go back and look at the
videos of WTC7 falling, I am jolted right back to possible government complici...See More

John HerrickBuilding 7 did not have
any floors between floor 1 and 4 and none between 4 and 7. The area between 1
and 4 was air, a soaring space. The area between 4 and 7 was an open area for
machinery.If the
building fell at "freefall" speed, then it makes sense, there was
nothing to impede the fall at first.

John HerrickThird, the building was
built over a ConEd substation which took up half of
the block. In addition there was a subway under the end of the building and a
ramp down to supply the rest of the World Trade Center. Between those three,
the structure had to span areas no other building ever has had to.

Mike BarnwellJohn, this is an involved subject. It has been
going for the last 16 years. There have been many wild theories, including the government's.Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth

are the most professional when it comes to this
subject. If you are interested you should check out their work.

I did read your post. With all due respect to my
fellow atheist friend, I don't find them convincing. Do you really think that
none of those 2,900 A&Es would pursue this subject for the last dozen years
and not be acquainted with the plans of the WTC7? These A&Es know every
nook and cranny of those buildings. If you have the time, check the works of
Steven E. Jones, David Ray Griffin and Dr. NielsHarrit. A lot of people discount the opposing theories of
9/11 without looking at the evidence offered. I had bought wholesale the
government's conspiracy theory until my eyes were opened to credible
alternative theories.

John HerrickMiracle #2Symmetrical
collapse....NO, look at the videos! The left side in the video was not the same
as the right! But so what? It was a box!All 82
columns had to fail at the same time.....which they did. The failure of a
portion pulled the rest out of line, see detail below.

John Herrick"It is difficult
to understand how this could have occurred without the aid of
explosives"......no, it is logical, given the unconventional structure due
to the ConEd generators, the subway, and the ramp. He
does not mention them.Past
buildings did not collapse......past buildings did not have the ConEd generators, the subway, and the ramp.Asymmetrical
fires could not have caused a symmetrical collapse.....wrong, see the diagram.
The steel was asymmetrical due to the ConEd
generators, the subway, and the ramp.Sudden onset
of the collapse....what? He wanted parts to fail first? Look at the diagram!
The entire mid part of the structure was compromised!Fire would
have weakened the steel gradually....checkNo sign of a
slow start....check, the building started and with nothing to stop it on floors
1 to 8, it just came down. (now on to
showing controlled demolition, another strawman)

John HerrickIs this armchair guy
all you have Mike? All he has is
"look, I see demolition", where everyone else has facts and reality.Where is his
explanation as to how thousands of pounds of explosives were installed?Where is his
explanation as to how someone would have known Building 7 would have had ANY
debris damage?Where is his
explanation as to why the guys with the explosives waited 7 hours to set the
explosives off?

John Herrick>>>Remember
this guy is a preacher, into nonsensical stuffAfter
teaching theology and Eastern religions at the University of Dayton, Griffin
came to appreciate the distinctively postmodern aspects of Whitehead's thought.
In particular, Griffin found Whitehead's nonsensationist
epistemology and panexperientialist ontology
immensely helpful in addressing the major problems of modern philosophy,
including the problems of mind-body interaction, the interaction between free
and determined things, the emergence of experience from nonexperiencing
matter, and the emergence of time in the evolutionary process.>>>>He
has had no training in structural engineering.

John HerrickTwin Towers Miracle #4Again,
freefall. (This time "essentially" freefall.) ....big difference. Not
a problem...checkStructural
damage, fires, gravity............check47 core
columns........wrong, the 47 core columns were only in the lower part of the
buildings, NOT at the 87th floor and up.Top part fell
down on the lower part........checkSports car
hits back of semi doing 90 (or 80) miles an hour and that pushes semi down the
highway at 80 miles an hour ......that is not what the argument is, another strawman that does not work at all.NIST wants us
to believe that the falling rubble is not resisted by anything but
air...............wrong, the 80 floors IS mostly air, but the perimeter support
beams were pushed out, allowing the massive top part to come through.(see below)

John HerrickMiracle #5The beginning
of the fall began with a massive explosion......Another lie, there was NO
explosion...besides, where is the explanation as to who knew which floor the
planes were to hit, how the explosives were transported into the building an...See More

John HerrickExplosives such as RDX
or nanothermite (nanothermite
does not exist) could explain ejected beams..............NOTE: he did not watch
the video behind him that showed the top of the structure falling to the side,
an explanation of some of the peripheral damage, otherwise the falling debris
forced the outside columns out, as shown on the previous photo of the aftermath.

John HerrickMiracle #6Fires in the
towers melted the steel and evaporated steel............Another lie, no steel
had melted, the steel member shown appears to have rusted through.Spherical
iron particles proves that iron had melted....NOTE: the heating of rust p...See More

Mike BarnwellHey John, I appreciate the fact that you took the
time to watch the suggested video and have attempted a detailed rebuttal. I
truly admire you for such enthusiasm and attention to detail. Accordingly, I
will try to respond to your rebuttals. It will take me some time to frame my
responses, so bare with me and give me some time.

Mike BarnwellWith respect to Miracle
#4 you said: "47 core columns........wrong, the 47 core columns were only in
the lower part of the buildings, NOT at the 87th floor and up." You are in
big trouble here, John. The central core of 47 columns went all
the way to the top. "NIST claimed that six of the North Tower’s core
columns and ten of the South Tower’s were severed." where the planes
impacted the towers. So for starters you may want to double check this claim of
yours. This quickly caught my attention.

Mike BarnwellI would you to ponder the following very
carefully, John: "[E]ach
of these 110-story Twin Towers fell upon itself in about ten seconds at nearly
free-fall speed. This violates Newton’s Law of Conservation of Momentum that would
require that as the stationary inertia of each floor is overcome by being
hit, the mass (weight) increases and the free-fall speed decreases. Even if
Newton’s Law is ignored, the prevailing theory would have us believe that each
of the Twin Towers inexplicably collapsed upon itself crushing all 287 massive
columns on each floor while maintaining a free-fall speed as if the 100,000, or
more, tons of supporting structural-steel framework underneath didn’t
exist.78" - Griffin, David Ray. The New Pearl Harbor Revisited: 9/11, the
Cover-Up, and the Exposé (Kindle Locations 820-821). Interlink Publishing.
Kindle Edition.

Mike Barnwell"Another
structural engineer, Edward Knesl, has written: It is
impossible that heavy steel columns could collapse at the fraction of the
second within each story and subsequently at each floor below. . . . The
engineering science and the law of physics simply doesn’t know such
possibility. Only very sophisticated controlled demolition can achieve such
result, eliminating the natural dampening effect of the structural framing huge
mass that should normally stop the partial collapse.79" - Griffin, David
Ray. The New Pearl Harbor Revisited: 9/11, the Cover-Up, and the Exposé (Kindle
Locations 822-827). Interlink Publishing. Kindle Edition.

Mike Barnwell"Basic principles
of engineering (for example, the conservation of momentum principle) would
dictate that the undamaged steel structure below the collapse initiation zone
would, at the very least, resist and slow the downward movement of the stories
above. There is, indeed, a good chance that the structural strength of the
steelwork below would arrest the downward movement of the stories above. NIST
must explain why the intact structure below the impact zone offered so little
resistance to the collapse of the building.80" - Griffin, David Ray. The
New Pearl Harbor Revisited: 9/11, the Cover-Up, and the Exposé (Kindle
Locations 830-833). Interlink Publishing. Kindle Edition.

John HerrickMike Barnwell Miracle
#4 core columns." the
perimeter columns -- and steel columns
in all tall buildings -- the thickness of the steel in the core columns tapered
from bottom to top. Near the bottoms of the towers the steel was four inches
thick, whereas near the tops it may have been as little as 1/4th inch
thick."

You are
right, they were continuous, they just were not substantial after a point.

John HerrickMike Barnwell said:
"It is impossible that heavy steel columns could collapse at the fraction
of the second within each story and subsequently at each floor below. "
and " the undamaged steel structure below the collapse initiation zone
would, at the very least, resist and slow the downward movement of the stories
above. "

It does not
take a genius to know that a multi thousand ton hammer moving hundreds of feet
per minute can crumple a metal column or a steel structure instantly. This is
just a fallacy from ignorance.

Mike BarnwellAnd BTW, John, somewhere above you seemed to insinuate
that because Dr. David Ray Griffin is a Theologian he is automatically
unqualified to have an informed opinion on the matter being debated. I have
read some of his books and listened to some of his presentations and I am
persuaded that he knows what he is talking about.

John HerrickMike Barnwell said:
"A lot of people discount the opposing theories of 9/11 without looking at
the evidence offered. I had bought wholesale the government's conspiracy theory
until my eyes were opened to credible alternative theories."

I have looked
at all the "evidence" and found that there is nothing there, I have
given you a true explanation that counters each point. The "alternative
theories" are not credible.

John HerrickMiracle #1 -
Fire.....There was a huge fire in floors 5 through 8, sufficient to cause
expansion in the steel and thus dislodge steel columns.Miracle #2 -
Symmetrical collapse......yes, the upper 40 stories were a box, and it all came
down together.Miracle #3 -
"Freefall for 2 seconds" .....yes there was a void from the ground
floor to floor 8. Not a miracle, reality.Miracle #4 -
Twin Towers nearly freefall ....yes, nearly.Miracle #5 -
"Massive explosion in the Twin Towers before they began to
fall".....there is no evidence of that! The only loud noises heard were
elevators falling, and the people's bodies hitting the roofs down below. There
was no "massive explosion", listen to the videos!Miracle #6 -
Fires in the towers melted the steel and evaporated steel............Another
lie, no steal beams or columns melted or "evaporated".
Microscopic beads of iron were rust.